On 4th of June, 1858, John Bright, one of the greatest orators in the British House of Commons, raised a question: “How long does England propose to govern India? Nobody can answer that question. But, be it 50 or 100 or 500 years, does any man with the smallest glimmering of common sense believe that so great a country, with its 20 different nationalities, and 20 different languages, can ever be bound up and consolidated into one compact and enduring empire confine? I believe such a thing to be utterly impossible.”Read full Article in PDF format
{ 14 comments… read them below or add one }
Next Comments →
A well written article, indeed.
It, however, takes liberties with historical facts and opinions are dished without preparing the relevant base. The author’s overall thrust and direction of thought process is praiseworthy, but it should not happen at the cost of academic integrity and historical evidence.
Thanks for reading the article critically. I appreciate your opinion. Regrettably, it was intended to be an article for the common reader of newspaper articles. For sake of brevity, I did not give references of books. The word ‘Historical Evidence’ needs to be examined. Is it not all hearsay? Evidence is what our modern day Courts will admit as Evidence. As Hugh Walpole said,”All History is a Lie.” Wikepedia, in our modern times is the best example of what will become ‘authentic recorded history’. And Wikepedia is far more open to examination and criticism. ‘Historical Evidence’ was written by the Church and State, with an agenda, and critics were banished or punished. Commonsense and commonsense alone gives us insight into the Truth. That is the only way, how all ‘Historical Evidence’ needs to be examined. A Momin is someone who critically examines and refuses to accept anything as Truth, on its face value, even it was the word of God. “They refuse to accept blindly, even if the word of God was presented to them”. [ Quran, Alfurqan 25: 73] This has been my approach in examining everything, be it history or a scientific paper. Asarul’Islam
who ever wrote this article has put the history in somehow right order but their is something ….either he doesn’t have enough knowledge about islam or he doesn’t want to pratice the religon….because he noted the prayer as ritual….prayer is not a ritual…it is the one of the five pilars of islam….so please try to get some knowledge….
i agree with your order of historical events…but not for the aurangzeb…because he was and is a repectabel person in the muslim society…and i wonder how you missed the akbar who tried to originate his own religon….
i agree wahabees are what the scholars call a fitna….
by the way you missed yazid who was the symbol of imperialism..
@Jalal ul Deen – what is dreamy mr jalal ul deen ? – and newspapers, then or now, are written by men, not Allah
(swt)
v goooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooog
reply mst
5star
Maulan Mir Hasan, a well respected personality among the Tolue Islam circles said about the founder of Ahmadiyya community.
“Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib came to the defence of Islam at a time when even the greatest scholar of the Faith could not dare to confront the opponents.”
(Monthly Nigar, Lucknow, India, October 1960)
“What I have studied so far of the founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, and not only me but anyone who studies his life and character sincerely and truthfully, will have to concede that he was a lover of the Holy Prophet, in the true sense, and had within him a sincere urge for the cause of Islam.”
(ibid., July 1960)
In a subsequent issue of the same monthly, the following comment appears about Hazrat Mirza:
“I found him to be a believer in the finality of prophethood, and a lover of the Holy Prophet in the true sense. When I studied the life of Mirza sahib, I found that he was certainly a very active, resolute and determined man. Having understood the true spirit of religion, he presented the same practical teachings of Islam as are to be found in the time of the Holy Prophet and the early Khalifas.”
(ibid., November 1961)
“Sadly, we did not appreciate him. I just cannot describe his spiritual accomplishments. His life was not that of ordinary men, nay, he was one of those persons who are the chosen servants of God and who appear but rarely.”"
There is no debate about ritual and form within the Ahmadiyya muslims or even against the orthodox mainstream. Socio-political theo-revolution was the same idea presented by Maudoodi or Syed Qutb. Muslim should worry about the spiritual revolution. If the sense of morality and compassion is corrected among muslims, their societies will change themselves.
Also, remember that Qaide Azam, in whose name this site has been created trusted an Ahmadi Sir. Zafrulla with matters of vital importance to Pakistan.
@Lutf – I do not hate the Ahmedis nor the Maudoodites, the Shi’ites, the Wahabbites. I cannot hate the sick but I do abhor disease. Sadly, fundamentalist movements amongst Muslims were sponsored by Anglo-Imperialist, only to divert Muslims away from the reawakening of the revolutionary socio-political Islam— To establish a government that distributes food and wealth based on the law of God.
We have failed to even think in this direction because we were diverted into meaningless debates about religious rituals that have no bearing on life and which have become ‘the be all and the end all’ for Muslims.
Besides, this website is named after MA Jinnah, the great leader. He chose an Ahmadi as his first foriegn minister.
what a daft comparison!. The British wanted to subjugate India through unification right? so how come a “prophet” unite a whole nation. History of religions confirms that prophets divide nations during their life times. i.e., believers vs non-believers. Secondly, the same British had already started their attempts to bring India in line with their world view by sending christian missionaires to India. India was teeming with missions of all christian denominations in the 19th century and number of indigenous converts was growing every year. If it wasn’t for the founder of Ahmadiyya community, India would have been a christain country like most of Africa. Secondly, why on earth a British sponsored prophet “kill” Jesus who was resurrected and sits on the right hand of God?
You just can not compare the Ahmadiyya movement with the Talibs and their likes. Try looking at the reason you wanted to find the comparison. You hate Taliban as much as the Ahmadis. So you dragged them both into one silly equation to support your conspiracy theories. You have your opinions on the violent, hate mongering fundamentalist organizations, and yes, I agree that they need to be dealt with by the muslims. But Ahmadiyya movement stands against these mullahs, and the Dajjal. Infact the Ahmadis believe that mullahs and dajjal are two sides of the same coin. And Dajjal is the civilization influenced and corrupted by the false christian beliefs. You have a lot to learn before you cook another of your theories.
@Jalal ul Deen –
You wrote: “I think article is written by someone who lives in dreams and rely his knowledge of discussions in living rooms. ” Who is a bigger dreamer than one who thinks that their interpretation of Islam qualifies him as the true and final messenger of Islam after Mohammed?
Next Comments →